Actscelerate.com Forum Index Actscelerate.com
Open Any Time -- Day or Night
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
@actscelerate Twitter  @actscelerate Facebook 

Forget COVID infection, it's QAnon all of you need to watch out for L

 
   Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Acts-Celerate Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Message Author
Post Forget COVID infection, it's QAnon all of you need to watch out for L Rafael D Martinez
https://religionnews.com/2020/08/17/qanon-the-alternative-religion-thats-coming-to-your-church/?s=04

It's not "coming" as is quite obvious through postings jere present and past, but it's very much at home in Churches of God across the nation. This is expected as Jesus said in Matthew 24. But as so many of us don't read Scripture anymore but read nice Bible study curricula or podcasts by neoreligious mavens, as the old book says, "it came to pass."

I'm so done with this mess and look to you for our nation's salvation, not the mire of the sons of men squabbling with each other.

Shorten the days, Lord. Por favor .. Let it come to pass and not stay.
_________________
www.spiritwatch.org

Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth? Galatians 4:16

These are trying times. Everyone's trying something and getting caught. The Church Lady, 1987
Acts-dicted
Posts: 7733
8/18/20 9:52 am


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Dave Dorsey
Politics aside - and please try to put them aside, even though QAnon does tend to align more with one side - I could not agree with this more.

QAnon has become a massive internet phenomenon and they are without doubt currently trying to "recruit".

It is not even a conspiracy theory - it goes beyond that, as the article says, to a set of beliefs so unfalsifiable that they can only be described as a religion.

In the past week I have seen members of my family innocently sharing and discussing false QAnon material about child abductions, etc. Fortunately I was able to have some discussions with them and show them where it was coming from.

I would urge all pastors to educate themselves about the QAnon conspiracy theory and the way it has grown. Many Republicans have repudiated QAnon and people within the White House have expressed how stupid and dangerous it is. This does not need to be a political thing, even though it is politically charged. It is something everyone of all political stripes should be learning about so that they can recognize the early signs of adoption in friends, family, and fellow church members.

Thanks for posting this.
Now 67% friendlier!
Posts: 13511
8/18/20 10:38 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post shaunbwilson
Thank you for sharing this.
_________________
Signature Themes: Connectedness | Futuristic | Ideation | Intellection | Learner
Site Admin
Posts: 3115
8/18/20 1:57 pm


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Link
I think part of what contributes to this is artificial intelligence. Facebook and Google have algorithms that feed us what we like to see. If you like conspiracy theories a little, the algorithms may feed you more. If you stay on these platforms a lot, you are bombarded with these theories. They start to seem normal.

Fox News is has a pro-Trump spin. They are more inclined to repeat things that support Trump. Conservatives get a certain spin to the information they take in.

I'm not liberal, but I suspect liberals who have liberals on their Facebook feeds get liberal content and conspiracy theories. I consider some of the allegations against Trump to be akin to conspiracy theories. YouTube suggest content based on previously watched information. The psychological effect of these platforms is very powerful.

I am not an MD, but isn't there some evidence that hydroxychloroquine may actually be effective? Is it so unreasonable that there may be some hired employees working in the government trying to help oust Trump? That does not seem unlikely from the impeachment trials. Some conspiracy theories may be far fetched, but there may be enough truth to them to make them compelling.

And the left-wing media does report 'fake news' to some extent. Just the selection of content-- leaving out some of the bad things BLM protesters were doing, selecting junk left-wing content and making that out as newsworthy. The worst thing is the spin. I'll give you an example. CNN had a page up on Roy Moore in which it said that he said that the 14th amendment, which extended Bill of Rights protections to states, was problematic. I looked it up, and he was talking about the problem of the states having no authority over gun rights. He seemed to be in favor of respecting the law, even though leaving gun rights out of the 14th amendment might be considered problematic. Rational liberals should certainly agree.

This type of twisting arguments is so common on network news also. The reporter Trump had kicked out for a while said Trump was 'lying' for calling people coming across the border an 'invasion.' That's biased an unprofessional language. He should have called it inflammatory language. Trump should watch his words, but it seems like the left wing side of the news apparatus in this country has definitely gone down the toilet, and Fox has a similar conservative spin. I can stomach Fox News. I can't tell if it is because they are less snarky than CNN or MSNBC or if it is more palatable because Fox's perspective is more palatable.

The polarized news and social media, IMO, is growing the cultural divide in this country.
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11475
8/18/20 6:11 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Dave Dorsey
Link wrote:
I think part of what contributes to this is artificial intelligence. Facebook and Google have algorithms that feed us what we like to see. If you like conspiracy theories a little, the algorithms may feed you more. If you stay on these platforms a lot, you are bombarded with these theories. They start to seem normal.

Link, you're exactly right. There have been several articles showing how Twitter and Facebook have inadvertently radicalized people into QAnon, anti-vaccination beliefs, conspiracy theories, etc. as a result of their recommendation algorithms. They have recently started taking steps to fix this, but a ton of damage has already been done.
Now 67% friendlier!
Posts: 13511
8/18/20 6:16 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Da Sheik
We’ve got a few Q disciples and they spend all their time spreading conspiracy theories on social media. When I try to counter their extremism they assure me that I’ve been brainwashed by the mainstream media. Q’s prophecies and predictions are always so generic they can be easily explained away when they don’t come to pass.

Do I believe the MSM have an agenda ? Yes. Do I believe there are evil people in government and in Hollywood ? Yes. Do I believe Satan is currently the “god of this age”? Yes. But I think the proper response is to spend more time in the Word and less time on tv and the Internet. But what do I know ?
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1748
8/18/20 6:25 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post shaunbwilson
Link wrote:
I am not an MD, but isn't there some evidence that hydroxychloroquine may actually be effective?


Link, I respect what you have written in this post, but the answer to this specific question is "no." There has not been any serious evidence that hydroxychloroquine may be effective of which I'm aware, and there have been several serious studies that prove it is not. This is the only point in your post with which I take issue, but I thought it was important to highlight that this one is a huge, dangerous conspiracy theory.
_________________
Signature Themes: Connectedness | Futuristic | Ideation | Intellection | Learner
Site Admin
Posts: 3115
8/18/20 9:51 pm


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Link
shaunbwilson wrote:
Link wrote:
I am not an MD, but isn't there some evidence that hydroxychloroquine may actually be effective?


Link, I respect what you have written in this post, but the answer to this specific question is "no." There has not been any serious evidence that hydroxychloroquine may be effective of which I'm aware, and there have been several serious studies that prove it is not. This is the only point in your post with which I take issue, but I thought it was important to highlight that this one is a huge, dangerous conspiracy theory.


Consider this: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857920300996?casa_token=XOncxD5FnE8AAAAA:wJ8cISzXItdyqrZYAHeV8yPZDAUin1qQNGSy7kCr-jzbXoKc2KfwF-M44w3teXoLso-RoZPgcHU
Quote:
Results
Six patients were asymptomatic, 22 had upper respiratory tract infection symptoms and eight had lower respiratory tract infection symptoms.

Twenty cases were treated in this study and showed a significant reduction of the viral carriage at D6-post inclusion compared to controls, and much lower average carrying duration than reported in the litterature for untreated patients. Azithromycin added to hydroxychloroquine was significantly more efficient for virus elimination.

Conclusion
Despite its small sample size, our survey shows that hydroxychloroquine treatment is significantly associated with viral load reduction/disappearance in COVID-19 patients and its effect is reinforced by azithromycin.


Here is one against: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2766117
Quote:

Key Points
Question Among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is there an association between use of hydroxychloroquine, with or without azithromycin, and in-hospital mortality?

Findings In a retrospective cohort study of 1438 patients hospitalized in metropolitan New York, compared with treatment with neither drug, the adjusted hazard ratio for in-hospital mortality for treatment with hydroxychloroquine alone was 1.08, for azithromycin alone was 0.56, and for combined hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin was 1.35. None of these hazard ratios were statistically significant.

Meaning Among patients hospitalized with COVID-19, treatment with hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, or both was not associated with significantly lower in-hospital mortality.


I just saw a couple of academic articles on Google scholar that presented a hypothetical argument that combining zinc with hydroxychloroquine could be affective.

The Pentecostal African lady doctor who is really into some interesting ideas on deliverance whose video has been circulating said she gave hydroxychloroquine zihtromax (I think. Maybe it is azithromycin?), combined with zinc and vitamin C. She said she treated over 300 patients including a 92 year old and had not lost any.

300 people is a good solid sample size, at least in my field. If she has data and permission, maybe she has data for a quasi-experimental paper. They could compare with 300 people who did not take the meds. It could be that the two meds combined with zinc and vitamin C have a high success rate, while hydroxychloroquine or hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin might be effective. It needs to be studied.

But it is odd that theee government allows off-label prescriptions for most products, but hydroxychloroquine , which is over the counter in some countries, is being restricted.
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11475
8/18/20 11:40 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post shaunbwilson
Thanks for sharing this information, Link. I will say upfront that I do not plan to reply to this topic in this thread again because it technically hijacks the thread. However, I will respond to the articles you shared.

In response to the first study you posted, "Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin as a treatment of COVID-19: results of an open-label non-randomized clinical trial," there are several links within the link you posted itself showing that this observational study is not considered serious evidence that HCQ works within the medical community.

"Publishing in face of the COVID-19 pandemic" wrote:
After internal and external (post-publication) review, some of the concerns regarding the paper's methodology were substantiated. Consequently, the ISAC Executive Committee, in collaboration with Elsevier, discussed a variety of options in regard to how to proceed. Despite the flaws in methodology, we have elected not to withdraw the publication by Gautret et al. We believe, in addition to the importance of sharing observational data at the height of a pandemic, a robust public scientific debate about the paper's findings in an open and transparent fashion should be made available.


"Reply to Gautret et al: hydroxychloroquine sulfate and azithromycin for COVID-19: what is the evidence and what are the risks?" wrote:
Despite in vitro data on efficacy of (hydroxy)chloroquine and azithromycin on SARS-CoV-2, there is no in vivo data that supports this. . . .

. . . In a recently published study by Gautret et al. the authors concluded that hydroxychloroquine monotherapy and hydroxychloroquine in combination with azithromycin reduced viral load. However, this trial has several major methodological issues, including the design, outcome measure and the statistical analyses. In this paper we discuss the background, clinical evidence, pharmacology and methodological issues related to this clinical trial. We understand the rush to release results, however in case conclusions are far reaching the evidence needs to be robust.


"Review of: “Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin as a treatment of COVID-19: results of an open-label non-randomized clinical trial Gautret et al 2010, DOI:10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2020.105949" wrote:
As outlined below, this study suffers from major methodological shortcomings which make it nearly if not completely uninformative. Hence, the tone of the report, in presenting this as evidence of an effect of hydroxychloroquine and even recommending its use, is not only unfounded, but, given the desperate demand for a treatment for Covid-19, coupled with the potentially serious side-effects of hydroxychloroquine, fully irresponsible.

I have not seen a single review or reply to this trial supporting its methodologies or considering it as serious evidence that hydroxychloroquine should be considered effective.

If the African lady has a randomized controlled trial (RCT) showing that her protocol works, she should publish it. Otherwise, it is also an observational study that is not considered serious evidence in the medical community. This was discussed extensively in this post.

Link wrote:
300 people is a good solid sample size, at least in my field. If she has data and permission, maybe she has data for a quasi-experimental paper. They could compare with 300 people who did not take the meds. It could be that the two meds combined with zinc and vitamin C have a high success rate, while hydroxychloroquine or hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin might be effective. It needs to be studied.


This would be an observational study, and per the NIH (in 2012, long before medicine bizarrely became politicized), "observational studies cannot be used to make definitive statements of fact about the 'safety, efficacy, or effectiveness' of a practice."[1]

Link wrote:
But it is odd that theee government allows off-label prescriptions for most products, but hydroxychloroquine , which is over the counter in some countries, is being restricted.


This is actually not as odd as it might seem. If you check the second link you posted, "secondary outcomes [of treating with HCQ] were cardiac arrest and abnormal electrocardiogram findings (arrhythmia or QT prolongation)." If the medicine has been shown to make things worse, it is not odd that the government would restrict off-label prescriptions. Additionally, I would suggest that the government even has a vested interest in allowing off-label use since it purchased 60,000,000 doses of HCQ.[2]

Bringing it back to what you posted in relation to the article that Raphael posted, this "both sides even when one has been thoroughly debunked" thinking is exactly what we are dealing with when it comes to Facebook serving you more of what you click. The sentiment that there may be evidence that HCQ works despite the fact that it has been debunked by the scientific community is one that has been spread by a very small number of conspiracy theory posters, and Facebook and Twitter's algorithms allowed that sentiment to spread for far too long after it was debunked. (To be clear, I am not proposing censorship. I am not saying that Facebook and Twitter should not allow these posts. I am simply saying that their platforms and platforms like theirs are what allowed the sentiment to spread.) The problem is the echo chamber where we accept what seems like an avalanche of information in support of the view we wish to espouse while rejecting the information that is coming from the vast majority of experts in the field. It is inexperience in or underuse of critical thinking. If a conspiracy is true, all you need to do is convince the experts, which in this case is a network of politically diverse, trained professionals throughout the country and the world. There is no field in which this is more cut and dry than the empirical field of pharmacology.
_________________
Signature Themes: Connectedness | Futuristic | Ideation | Intellection | Learner


Last edited by shaunbwilson on 8/19/20 1:49 pm; edited 1 time in total
Site Admin
Posts: 3115
8/19/20 8:23 am


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Eddie Robbins
Our tribe is loaded with believing in most every conspiracy theory that goes against Democrats and supports Republicans. Truth doesn’t matter anymore, it seems. Acts-pert Poster
Posts: 16474
8/19/20 1:40 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Link
ShawnbWilson,

Observational data is data collected without the subjects knowledge or consent, right? That's a research ethics issue. Why would it be a serious methodological one? If the data is foreign, it may not be a legal issue.

I don't know enough about the data to say one way or another, but would any scientist say the use of these medicines have been __debunked__. Have the combinations of medicines been used that the African doctor suggested.

Also, mathematically speaking, hypothesis testing using statistics does not actually prove anything. We were taught to use terms like 'evidence' and 'statistically significant' and not 'proof.'
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11475
8/19/20 10:02 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Tom Sterbens
Eddie Robbins wrote:
Our tribe is loaded with believing in most every conspiracy theory that goes against Democrats and supports Republicans. Truth doesn’t matter anymore, it seems.


I would agree, Eddie.
I just disagree about who it is who is not only ignoring it but, as Paul wrote in Romans, are instead actively "suppressing the truth..."
The truth does indeed matter.

VIDEO INTERVIEW OF DR HARVEY RISCH

DR HARVY RISCH to AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY

YALE MEDICAL SCHOOL DEPARTMENT HEAD DEFENDING DR RISCH
Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4495
8/26/20 2:59 pm


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post The "evidence" is on both sides... Aaron Scott
For every study that claims that HCQ does NOT help, you find another--just as reputable--study that claims the opposite.

There are flaws in most studies. Some are more glaring or more serious. But consider that if a person is purposely lying about HCQ, that would deeply tarnish their record, could even cost them their license.

I have just about concluded that NO ONE knows what to do. We hear that masks should NOT be wrong. Well, yes, wear masks. But not now.

We hear that if you've been exposed to COVID-19, you must be tested. Then, today, we hear, nope, not unless you have symptoms (which is the way the Florida prison system proceeded at some point).

What you believe (or don't believe) seems dependent on your political leanings. For instance, I don't know how my brothers/sisters on Actscelerate lean, but I dare say that if you are against Trump (even if you are conservative), you are also highly skeptical of HCQ. And vice versa.

I don't know what QANON is, though I have heard it mentioned many times. I just figure it's more of the same, based on the postings here.

It is indeed the case that Christians are utterly GULLIBLE when it comes to political sorts of "facts."

My wife, new to Facebook, asked me last night if it was true that people would be breaking the law if they didn't stand for "Lift Every Voice and Sing." I told her it wasn't true. She has not yet had the time to set her mental filter for all the comes via Facebook. She is usually very skeptical, but see it in print....

Besides, if folks won't stand for THE national anthem and get away with it, I reckon you can do the same with any other anthem.
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5568
8/27/20 7:14 am


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Acts-Celerate Post new topic   Reply to topic
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Acts-celerate Terms of Use | Acts-celerate Policy
World News Network | Acts-celerate Chat
Contact the Administrator.


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group :: Spelling by SpellingCow.